[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


    Let be rephrase the VOID proposal in terms of continuations,
hopefully making the semantics seem less arbitrary:
 1] THE and the result type for a function type are statements about
    the type of continuations with which it is legal to call a
    function or evaluate an expression.
 2] VALUES and the proposed VOID are only meaningful in this context
    because they can only apply to continuations, not the values of
 3] Stating that a continuation must be VOID is stating that the
    continuation cannot reference its arguments *in any way*.

Excepting the funny cases of MULTIPLE-VALUE-PROG1 and UNWIND-PROTECT,
these statements are comparable to the previous definition, but a bit
stronger.  The cases where I said that VOID should be erroneous are
those cases where it is obvious that the continuation for the
expression is not VOID.